FAS | Government Secrecy | News ||| Index | Search | Join FAS

Congressional Record: May 13, 1999 (House)
Page H3112-H3141



                 Amendment No. 4 Offered by Mr. Hinchey

  Mr. HINCHEY. Mr. Chairman, I offer amendment No. 4.
  The CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
  The text of the amendment is as follows:

       Amendment No. 4 offered by Mr. Hinchey:

                   AGENCY IN CHILE.

       (a) In General.--By not later than 120 days after the date 
     of the enactment of this Act, the Director of Central 
     Intelligence shall

[[Page H3124]]

     submit to the appropriate congressional committees a report 
     describing all activities of officers, covert agents, and 
     employees of all elements in the intelligence community with 
     respect to the following events in the Republic of Chile:
       (1) The assassination of President Salvador Allende in 
     September 1973.
       (2) The accession of General Augusto Pinochet to the 
     Presidency of the Republic of Chile.
       (3) Violations of human rights committed by officers or 
     agents of former President Pinochet.
       (b) Documentation.--(1) The report submitted under 
     subsection (a) shall include copies of unedited documents in 
     the possession of any such element of the intelligence 
     community with respect to such events.
       (2) Any provision of law prohibiting the dissemination of 
     classified information shall not apply to documents referred 
     to in paragraph (1).
       (c) Definition.--In this section, the term ``appropriate 
     congressional committees'' means the Permanent Select 
     Committee on Intelligence and the Committee on Appropriations 
     of the House of Representatives, and the Select Committee on 
     Intelligence and the Committee on Appropriations of the 

  Mr. HINCHEY. Mr. Chairman, because of recent activities by a certain 
member of the Spanish judiciary, the attention of the world has once 
again been directed at the events which took place in Chile beginning 
in September of 1973 with the assassination of the duly-elected 
president of that country, Salvador Allende, and the subsequent 
ascension to power of General Augusto Pinochet to become the President 
of the Republic of Chile.
  In the course of those events, it has been alleged in responsible 
venues over and over again in the intervening now more than 25 years 
that very inappropriate actions were taken by members of the Chilean 
military, assisted by others, including members of the military of the 
United States.
  I have an amendment which requires that no later than 120 days after 
the date of the enactment of this act, the director of the Central 
Intelligence Agency shall submit to the appropriate congressional 
committees which are mentioned in the amendment a report describing all 
activities of officers, covert agents, and employees of all elements of 
the intelligence community with respect to the following events in the 
Republic of Chile:
  One, the assassinations of President Salvador Allende in September of 
  Two, the ascension of General Augusto Pinochet to the presidency of 
the Republic of Chile; and
  Three, the violations of human rights committed by officers or agents 
of former President Pinochet.
  The report submitted under this subsection shall include copies of 
unedited documents in the possession of any such element of the 
intelligence community with respect to such events.
  Mr. Chairman, I think that after the passage of all of this time, it 
is appropriate that the United States Congress and the people of the 
United States and the people of the world understand with much greater 
clarity than they have been able to up to this moment the specific 
events which took place in Chile which led to the assassination of the 
duly-elected president and the ascension of power by a military junta.
  It is important for us to understand these events because it is 
important for us to take action to ensure that these kinds of illegal 
activities do not occur in the future.
  So therefore, I offer this amendment with all respect in the hopes 
that the Members of the House and the chairman particularly, the 
chairman of the Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, will see 
fit to look upon it favorably.
  Mr. GOSS. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word.
  Mr. Chairman, I appreciate the intent of the amendment very much, but 
I must say, I have some misgivings about the effect and the cost, and I 
want to take a minute to explain that.
  First, with regard to the purpose, let me say that our committee is 
trying, I think through its mark on the budget and through its 
oversight, to help our intelligence community focus on the challenges 
we have got today and coming in the next century. They are incredible 
challenges of a sort that we are really not organized to deal with, as 
we are seeing, unfortunately.
  We are in the process of getting that done, but we understand the 
Warsaw Pact is gone, and in its place we have the Osama Bin Ladens, the 
Milosevics, the Tijuana cartels, that type of problem.
  This amendment would, I think, have us take a break from the reality 
we are faced with today and go back and start sifting through some 
history of things that happened at a different time, really under a 
different agency that was operating under different rules and certainly 
under different oversight.
  That can be beneficial if it is going to yield us some lessons, but I 
think we ought to understand that if we are going to do this, it is 
going to take energy, effort, and dollars, and we want to make sure 
where we are prioritizing those relative to the lessons from history 
and whatever else we might glean from this effort.
  I am a little confused with regard to the extensive ongoing effort by 
the administration to respond to a request by the Spanish government 
under its mutual legal assistance treaty with the U.S. for documents, 
roughly in this same period. I presume these searches are related, but 
I do not know whether there is any formal coordination and how this 
amendment would fit into it.
  Going to the cost factor, legislation directing special searches, as 
I have said, is disruptive to the normal course of business, and the 
normal course of business in the intelligence communities these days, 
it is exceptionally challenging.
  I would also point out that when we have these special searches, that 
they sometimes delay requests of our own constituents under the Freedom 
of Information Act. I do not say that to say that we should not have 
special requests. I think we only need to point out that that sometimes 
  We have had considerable conversation with the head of the community, 
the intelligence community, about how we go about dealing with the 
classification and declassification process. That is ongoing. There is 
very definite bona fide concern about how much dollars and time and 
personnel we direct to that effort relative to other things that the 
intelligence community is being asked to provide for today's 
decisionmakers, to get us through the day. Of course, we have to figure 
out, where does the money come from.
  These are not new thoughts. I am only putting these on the record and 
getting them out of there because I do not want the gentleman to think 
that we are just knee-jerk reacting negatively. There are negative 
consequences to this amendment, in part.

                              {time}  1230

  The amendment would provide no new information to the public as far 
as I know, the people who are interested in the abuses of the Pinochet 
years. I think instead we are going to get lots of boxes going into a 
closed committee review, and I am not sure where that is going to lead 
  So I am concerned about, if the purpose is to get at the truth and 
the history and where we are doing it, I would like to do that in a 
reasonable way. I share the desire of the gentleman from New York (Mr. 
Hinchey) to do that.
  If the way we can do it passes muster with the community, and the 
costs are reasonable, and the expectations are reasonable given the 
personnel that we have, then I would possibly be in a position to 
accept this amendment with those understandings.
  So I ask to the gentleman from New York (Mr. Hinchey) to accept a 
second-degree amendment which would strike paragraph (2) of the section 
304(b) in its entirety. If so, and the House agrees to the amendment 
amending the gentleman's amendment in that way, I would accept his 
  The reason I say that is the amendment I would propose would cure the 
constitutional problem that I see in the provision which would have 
overridden all the laws authorizing the DCI and the President to 
protect sources of national security information from disclosure and 
compromise. We just accepted an amendment from the gentleman from New 
York (Mr. Sweeney) to strengthen that. So I do not want to now turn 
right around and undercut it.
  So with the offending provision omitted, any threat of the veto would 
be removed, we would be consistent, and I think I could see my way to 
supporting what the gentleman is trying to get done.
  Mr. Chairman, I yield to the gentleman from New York (Mr. Hinchey) 
for response on my proposal amendment.

[[Page H3125]]

  Mr. HINCHEY. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for yielding to me. 
As I understand it, the gentleman is offering an amendment to my 
amendment which would strike paragraph (2) of section 304(b) as 
proposed to be added by the amendment; is that correct?
  The CHAIRMAN. The time of the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Goss) has 
  (By unanimous consent, Mr. Goss was allowed to proceed for 1 
additional minute.)
  Mr. GOSS. Mr. Chairman, the gentleman from New York (Mr. Hinchey) is 
  Mr. HINCHEY. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman from Florida (Mr. 
Goss), the chairman of the Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, 
and I am happy to accept his amendment to my amendment.

Amendment Offered By Mr. Goss to Amendment No. 4 Offered By Mr. Hinchey

  Mr. GOSS. Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment to the amendment.
  The Clerk read as follows:

       Amendment offered by Mr. Goss to amendment No. 4 offered by 
     Mr. Hinchey:
       Strike paragraph (2) of section 304(b), as proposed to be 
     added by the amendment.

  Mr. GOSS. Mr. Chairman, that is the amendment we have had the 
discussion on. I have nothing further.
  Ms. PELOSI. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word.
  Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of the Hinchey amendment and commend 
the distinguished gentleman from Florida (Mr. Goss), the chairman of 
our committee, for his accommodation of the Hinchey amendment.
  But I want this amendment to survive the conference because I think 
the gentleman from New York (Mr. Hinchey) has provided some great 
leadership to us today in presenting this amendment. That is why I am 
very grateful to the gentleman from Florida (Chairman Goss) for his 
amendment to accommodate the gentleman from New York (Mr. Hinchey).
  Our distinguished chairman laid out some important considerations in 
his observation of this amendment, and they are important. There are 
other equities to be balanced, and I am glad that my colleagues have 
come to an agreement on the amendment. But, again, I want it to survive 
the conference. I want to commend the gentleman from New York (Mr. 
  Our President was in Guatemala a few months ago, or was it weeks? So 
much happens so fast around here. I was very proud of the statement 
that he made. Latin America had been in turmoil for a couple of 
generations, as we all know, some of it, sad to say, and in Guatemala 
in particular, with the involvement of the Central Intelligence Agency 
and other American entities there.
  The President, I think very courageously, recognized what happened 
there and, in doing so, I think began to open the door to a better 
future for the intelligence community.
  In Central America and in Latin America the expression ``nunca mas'' 
is so famous, because in Argentina, in Chile, and Central America, 
people are revisiting their sad recent past. An important bridge to the 
future has been truth commissions which have identified, not to find 
revenge, but to seek some level of justice and some level of openness 
and admission about what happened to clear a way for the future.
  If we, the United States and specifically the Central Intelligence 
Agency, had a role in the death of President Allende, just as if any 
Chilean had a role in it, putting it behind us requires facing the 
truth about it.
  So I think that, as far as Chile is concerned, this is a very 
important amendment, but I think it also will build credibility for us 
if we are not in a state of denial about the CIA's involvement but of 
acceptance of what the reality was. We will find out what that is as a 
result of the amendment of the gentleman from New York (Mr. Hinchey).
  I also, though, want to say that, unless we are forthcoming on our 
role, it is very hard to see why Latin Americans will be forthcoming 
about what their role is. I think that we can lead by example in this 
  I also would like to take the occasion to thank the gentleman from 
California (Mr. George Miller) for his leadership and activity in 
trying to persuade our government in making the documents available for 
the Pinochet case to the Spanish government. I hope that this will be a 
message to repressive dictators everywhere that a day of reckoning 
comes, and that they just cannot commit these atrocities and then say, 
well, let us put it all behind us.
  As I say again, this is not about revenge, it is about truth. It is 
about justice. It is about opening the way for a better future and 
building credibility for what we do.
  I agree with the gentleman from Florida (Chairman Goss). We should 
not jeopardize the safety of our sources and methods. I think that his 
amendment is a constructive one. These people risk their lives just the 
way our young people do in the military. We are proud of the military. 
We are proud of the people who put themselves in harm's way to gather 
intelligence for us.
  So while we are not condoning any activities that were not legal, we 
cannot proceed with reasonable intelligence gathering if those who are 
called upon to do so are in jeopardy because of unintentional 
  This is especially true at a time when we want more women, we want 
more minorities, we want more diversity, we want more language skills, 
we want more cultural understanding into the Central Intelligence 
Agency. We want them to have the same level of protection that others 
have had in the past.
  Building that diversity with an openness and an admission of what our 
past has been I think will build more support for what we need to have, 
which is the best possible intelligence to avoid conflict and to supply 
whoever the President of the United States is with the information he 
needs to lead.
  With that, again I commend the gentleman from New York (Mr. Hinchey) 
and the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Goss), our chairman, and the 
gentleman from California (Mr. Dixon), our ranking member, for their 
leadership on this issue.
  Mr. DIXON. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the requisite number of 
  Mr. Chairman, I think the gentleman from New York (Mr. Hinchey) is 
absolutely correct. The minority has no problem with this amendment.
  Mr. SANDERS. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the requisite number of 
  Mr. Chairman, I want to applaud the gentleman from New York (Mr. 
Hinchey) on his amendment. It is no great secret that over the years, 
there have been many aspects of American foreign policy which have been 
wrong. It is no secret that the United States over the years has been 
involved in the overthrow of a number of democratic governments.
  In the case of Chile in 1973, there was a democratic government 
elected by the people. The President of that government was Salvador 
Allende. His policies antagonized corporate interests in the United 
States. A great deal of pressure was brought to bear in seeing him 
  I think it is a very positive step as we develop ideas for the 
future, as we try to develop a democratic foreign policy that we in 
fact know what we did in the past.
  So I think the amendment of the gentleman from New York (Mr. Hinchey) 
is a very important one. I think we should let the truth come out, and 
I strongly support his efforts.
  Mr. GEORGE MILLER of California. Mr. Chairman, I rise in strong 
support of Mr. Hinchey's amendment to require a report to Congress on 
information held by the United States pertaining to human rights 
violations in Chile carried out by Gen. Augusto Pinochet and his 
  The 1973 military coup in Chile was a tragic interruption of Chile's 
proud democratic history. Thousands of innocent people were killed. 
Many more were tortured and imprisoned. American citizens are among the 
  The military coup in Chile also represents a tragic chapter in 
American history.
  It is now widely understood that the United States supported the 
violent overthrow of a democratically elected government. But the full 
details of U.S. support for the coup are still not known.
  We need to know the full details.
  In addition, the full details of U.S. information concerning the 
actions of the coup's leader, Gen. Augusto Pinochet, are not fully 
  It is widely understood that Gen. Pinochet directed the coup and the 
mass killings and torture that occurred during his nearly two decade 
long reign. But the American people

[[Page H3126]]

deserve to know and would be better off knowing the full details of 
Gen. Pinochet's actions.
  Only the United States at this point has the ability to fully inform 
its citizens of this ruthless dictator's actions.
  Along with my colleagues, I have been demanding that the United 
States supply information about Gen. Pinochet's murderous actions to a 
court in Spain that has brought charges against Gen. Pinochet for 
violations of international law, including torture, murder and 
  The United States is believed to house records that would corroborate 
the charges against Gen. Pinochet.
  Those records should be reviewed, declassified and turned over to the 
court in Spain. Some information has been turned over and after much 
delay the United States has established a task force to oversee this 
request. It is a slow process and many believe that some in the 
Administration would prefer that the information never see the light of 
  Without objection, I would like to submit into the Record a series of 
letters between myself, my colleague, John Conyers, and other members, 
including Mr. Hinchey, and the Administration.
  These letters explain the nature of the information we seek and the 
importance of providing the information to the Spanish court.
  The actions in the 1970s of the U.S. intelligence community and the 
then Secretary of State, Henry Kissinger, toward Chile and other 
dictators in the southern cone are a disgrace that should never be 
forgotten by American citizens who wish to think honorably about their 
country and their government.
  A journalist, Lucy Kosimar, recently uncovered a memo that describes 
how Secretary of State Kissinger coddled Pinochet after the coup.
  In a recent article, Kosimar wrote:

       The memo describes how Secretary of State Kissinger stroked 
     and bolstered Pinochet, how--with hundreds of political 
     prisoners still being jailed and tortured--Kissinger told 
     Pinochet that the Ford Administration would not hold those 
     human rights violations against him. At a time when Pinochet 
     was the target of international censure for state-sponsored 
     torture, disappearances, and murders, Kissinger assured him 
     that he was a victim of communist propaganda and urged him 
     not to pay too much attention to American critics.

  This is what Kissinger reportedly told Pinochet in a private meeting 
in 1976, according to Lucy Kosimar:

       In the United States, as you know,'' Kissinger told 
     Pinochet, ``we are sympathetic with what you are trying to do 
     here. I think that the previous government was headed toward 
     communism. We wish your government well.
       A little while later, Kissinger added: ``My evaluation is 
     that you are a victim of all left wing groups around the 
     world, and that your greatest sin was that you overthrew a 
     government which was going Communist.

  Kissinger decided that the international fight against communism 
justified the rape and torture of Chilean women, justified their 
mutilation. Justified their execution.
  More than 20 years later new information about the U.S. role in the 
coup and U.S. knowledge about human rights violations by Pinochet are 
still coming to light. Clearly there is more information that is housed 
in the intelligence communities' warehouses and that information should 
be made public.
  In 1976, an American citizen, Ronnie Moffitt, was blown up on the 
streets of Washington with her Chilean colleague, Orlando Letelier. 
Pinochet is widely suspected of having personally ordered their deaths.
  This act of terrorism should never be forgotten, in the hopes that it 
will never be repeated. Pinochet is living in London right now, 
awaiting the fate of an extradition hearing for trial in Spain.
  Whatever information the United States can provide on the deaths of 
Ronnie Moffitt and Orlando Letelier in Washington should be made 
available so the truth can be known once and for all and justice can be 
rendered in this ugly, ugly chapter of American and Chilean history.

Congressional Letters to the Clinton Administration on the Case Against 
                         Gen. Augusto Pinochet

       (1) November 23, 1998 Letter from Rep. George Miller to 
     Attorney General Janet Reno.
       (2) October 21, 1998 Letter from 36 Members of Congress to 
     President Clinton.
       (3) March 17, 1998 Letter from Reps. George Miller and John 
     Conyers to President Clinton, and the President's June 3 
       (4) April 15, 1997 Letter from Reps. Miller and Conyers to 
     Attorney General Reno and Mr. John Shattuck, Department of 
     State, and the Justice Department's May 23, 1997 response.
                                                November 23, 1998.
     Hon. Janet Reno,
     U.S. Attorney General,
     Department of Justice, Washington, DC.
       Dear Attorney General: I am writing to follow up on our 
     telephone conversation on the afternoon of Friday, November 
     13 concerning the United States response to the arrest of 
     Gen. Augusto Pinochet. I sincerely appreciate your taking the 
     time to speak with me about this issue.
       As you may recall, I raised three issues with you during 
     our conversation. First, I expressed my belief that the 
     United States still has not turned over to the judges in 
     Spain all materials in its possession that are relevant to 
     the cast against Gen. Pinochet. Second, I expressed my belief 
     that the United States should make available to Spain Michael 
     Townley for questioning, but that it had not yet done so. And 
     finally, I asked if you would grant a request for a meeting 
     that I understood was made by the widow and widower of the 
     Letelier-Moffitt assassinations, and their attorney.
       With regard to the meeting request for Isabel Letelier, 
     Michael Moffitt and their attorney, Sam Buffone, you informed 
     me that you were seriously considering such a meeting. I 
     sincerely appreciate your efforts in that regard.
       With regard to Michael Townley, you told me that you were 
     looking into the status of the request to make him available. 
     I wish to again urge that he be made available to the Spanish 
     judges for the purposes of questioning him about Gen. 
     Pinochet's association to criminal and terrorist activities. 
     As you probably know, Michael Townley was formerly in the 
     Witness Protection Program and his whereabouts are known to 
     the F.B.I. I would also urge you to make available Fernandez 
     Larios, a known terrorist who plead guilty to criminal 
     charges in the United States and can provide important 
     information about Gen. Pinochet. I would hope that the F.B.I. 
     and the Department of Justice have kept track of Mr. Larios 
     at least to the extent that he can be located for purposes of 
     serving a subpoena. It is my understanding that Judge Garzon 
     is prepared to come to the United States at any reasonable 
     time upon notice that Mr. Larios and/or Mr. Townley are 
       And finally, with regard to the materials requested by 
     Spain, you asked me to provide you with information about any 
     materials that may not yet already have been provided to 
     the judges. I am providing to you in this letter details 
     of materials that I believe are of interest to Spain and 
     relevant to their investigation of Gen. Pinochet but that 
     have not yet been made available.
       As you know, and as we discussed on the phone, the Spanish 
     judges conducting the Pinochet investigation have made 
     requests of the United States Government, through the Spanish 
     Ministry of Justice, for the production of testimony and 
     documents pursuant to the Mutual Legal Assistance in Criminal 
     Matters Treaty between the Spanish and U.S. Governments. It 
     is my understanding that a new request has just been made.
       While you and your staff are already familiar with the 
     treaty, I thought it would be important to raise a number of 
     points here to help clarify the responsibilities of the 
     United States in this area. There are several important 
     provisions in the MLAT that bear on the Spanish request for 
     cooperation. First, under Article I, Section 3, assistance is 
     to be provided without regard to whether the act giving rise 
     to the request for assistance is a crime in the requested 
     country. Accordingly, so long as the Spanish court has 
     confirmed its jurisdiction to investigate the claims against 
     Pinochet, it is irrelevant whether or not they would be valid 
     claims under U.S. law. The only requirement under the MLAT 
     for dual criminality is in cases of claims for forfeiture or 
     restitution. Under Article IV, a request for documents 
     requires only a generalized description of what is sought for 
     production. Under Section 3 of Article IV, additional 
     specificity should be provided to the extent necessary and 
     where possible. These provisions require specificity 
     regarding individuals to be questioned, but do not contain 
     any additional requirement of specification as to the 
     description of evidence or documents. Article V, Section 6, 
     requires that the requested country respond to reasonable 
     inquiries concerning the progress towards full compliance 
     with the request.
       Confidentiality is governed in part by Article VII which 
     would permit the U.S. to require that any information or 
     evidence furnished under the Treaty be kept confidential or 
     used only under specific terms and conditions by the Spanish 
     court. Classification is further covered by Article IX which 
     provides for the production of records of government 
     agencies. Under Subsection 1, all publicly available 
     documents must be provided. Subsection 2 permits the 
     requested state to provide copies of any documents in its 
     possession which are not publicly available to the same 
     extent and under the same condition as copies would be made 
     available in Spain to judicial authorities or in the United 
     States ``to its own law enforcement and judicial 
     authorities.'' The requested state is, however, permitted to 
     deny a request pursuant to these provisions entirely or in 
     part. Accordingly, while the Treaty does not deal directly 
     with classified information, the U.S. is granted broad 
     discretion to produce or withhold classification and should 
     do so to the same extent that it would provide such 
     information to domestic law enforcement or judicial 
     authorities. Article XII requires that the U.S. use its best 
     efforts to ascertain the location or identity of persons or 
     items specified in a request.
       As I said on the phone, there are serious questions raised 
     as to whether the U.S. has complied with both the spirit and 
     letter of the Mutual Legal Assistance Treaty. Despite

[[Page H3127]]

     the long pendency of several letters of request, it is my 
     understanding that the U.S. has not discharged its 
     obligations under Article XII to use its best efforts to 
     ascertain the location of either persons or documents. The 
     U.S. has failed to produce key individuals for testimony and 
     has not conducted a complete search of documents in the 
     possession of government agencies, including the Central 
     Intelligence Agency, Department of Defense, and the FBI. 
     Further, it is my understanding the U.S. has refused to 
     produce classified documents when the letter and spirit of 
     Article IX should permit, if not require, production to the 
     same extent that documents were provided to the U.S. 
     Attorneys Office during the initial Letelier-Moffitt 
       The Justice Department, as the convening authority, should 
     also reassess the extent and vigor of its effort to locate 
     and produce documents. There are certain classes of 
     identifiable records that should be searched for and if 
     available, immediately produced:
       1. Defense Intelligence Agency Reports, such as 
     ``Directorate of National Intelligence (DINA) Expands 
     Operations and Facilities,'' April 15, 1975 along with 
     referenced ``IRs'' and all other cables and reports from the 
     U.S. Defense Attache's office in Santiago during the mid-
     1970's that relate to the Chilean Secret police, the chain of 
     command, human rights abuses, and international terrorism.
       2. Defense Intelligence Agency Biographic Data, the yearly 
     commentary and career summaries on military commanders done 
     by the DIA--in this case on General Pinochet and Col. Gen. 
     Manual Contreras between 1974-78.
       3. State and NSC Documents identified in ``Disarray in 
     Chile Policy,'' July 1, 1975. This document states that ``a 
     number of officers in the Embassy at Santiago have written a 
     dissent'' cable arguing that all U.S. assistance to Chile be 
     cut off ``until the human rights situation improved.'' This 
     cable was discussed at a ``pre-IG (Interagency Group) 
     meeting--presumably in June 1975. It was supported by the 
     Policy Planning Office of the Bureau of Inter-American 
       A specific paper trail can be ascertained, including but 
     not limited to:
       a. the ``Dissent'' cable from the U.S. Embassy officers;
       b. minutes/notes/briefing papers for/of the ``pre-IG 
       c. all position papers relating to this discussion prepared 
     by the Policy Planning Office at the Bureau of Inter-American 
       4. Bureau of Intelligence and Research, Department of 
     State, reports, summaries, and briefing papers on the Chilean 
     military, DINA, and human rights violations, 1973-80.
       5. The Chile Files of the Office of the Assistant Secretary 
     of State for Human Rights, Patricia Derian, 1977-80. These 
     files, kept by Ms. Derian's Deputy Marc Schneider, likely 
     contain a wealth of information on Chile's human rights 
     atrocities, and also on the Letelier case and the issue of 
     U.S. extradition of Chilean officials, and sanctions against 
     Pinochet's government for lack of cooperation in the case.
       In addition to the above records and document groups 
     identified by the Spanish court, U.S. cooperation under MLAT 
     should include reviews of other relevant files. These 
       1. A critical document on General Pinochet's role in the 
     Letelier bombing, read by Justice Department prosecutor 
     Eugene Propper during the federal investigation into the 
       2. CIA Reports between 1973 and 1979 by the Agency's Office 
     of African and Latin American Affairs (A/LA) on Chile's 
     military, chain of command, DINA, Operation Condor, General 
     Pinochet and human rights violations, assassination of 
     General Carlos Prats in September 1975, and Orlando Letelier 
     in September 1976.
       3. CIA Directorate of Operations cables and reports on 
     Operation Condor--including Chile's attempt to establish an 
     Operation Condor office in Miami in 1974; the assassination 
     of Carlos Prats, and Orlando Letelier, and other human rights 
       4. A review by the Gerald Ford Presidential Library staff 
     (Karen Holzhausen) of the still classified Kissinger-
     Scowcroft files relating to Chile, terrorism and human rights 
       5. A review by the Jimmy Carter Presidential Library staff 
     for the still classified Bzrezinski files on Chile, human 
     rights violations, and sanctions against Chile for the 
     Letelier assassination; and the files of National Security 
     Council advisor on Latin America, Robert Pastor, for similar 
       6. A search by the CIA-FBI Center for Counter terrorism for 
     files, including those of the predecessor to that agency, on 
     Chilean involvement in international terrorism.
       7. A re-review of heavily censored NSC and State Department 
     documents released during legal discovery in the Letelier-
     Moffitt civil suit.
       A thorough review and collection of relevant U.S. documents 
     is critical to the Spanish judges' investigation. But I hope 
     you would agree that it is also critical for the United 
     States to gather this material to help our own government 
     decide whether it too should take legal action against Gen. 
       As I expressed to you on the phone, I have a long history 
     of involvement with Chile, beginning with my participation in 
     a congressional investigation in Chile in 1976, prior to the 
     assassination of Orlando Letelier and Ronnie Moffitt. In 
     fact, Mr. Letelier had helped to facilitate the congressional 
     trip to Chile. Chile has a long and proud history of 
     democracy. Gen. Pinochet's military coup was an aberration in 
     Chile's history. His rule was marked by extreme violence, 
     total disregard for human and civil rights, and by 
     international act of terrorism, including the assassination 
     on U.S. soil of an American citizen and a Chilean exile.
       Given this Administration's stated commitment to promoting 
     human rights and democracy and to curbing global terrorism, I 
     consider the legal fate of Gen. Pincochet to be a matter of 
     utmost concern for the United States Government.
       Again, I sincerely appreciate your time and attention to 
     this matter and I will appreciate being appraised of the 
     status of these requests.
     George Miller, M.C.

                                                 October 21, 1998.
     Hon. William Jefferson Clinton,
     The White House, Washington, DC.
       Dear Mr. President: The October 17 arrest of General 
     Augusto Pinochet in London is a good example of how the goals 
     you outlined in your anti-terrorism speech at the United 
     Nations can be put into practice. Indeed, when the rule of 
     law is applied to combat international lawlessness, 
     humanity's agenda gains.
       We are writing to urge you to reinforce your eloquent words 
     at the recent United Nations General Assembly session by 
     joining with the British government in fully cooperating with 
     the precedent-setting case against Chilean General Augusto 
     Pinochet in Spain. Specifically, we call upon you to ensure 
     that the U.S. government provides Spanish Judge Baltasar 
     Garzon material related to Pinochet's role in international 
     terrorism--material and testimony that the U.S. government 
     has thus far withheld.
       You will recall that on June 3, in response to a 
     congressional request, you wrote to assure us that the United 
     States would ``continue to respond as fully as we can to the 
     request for assistance from the Government of Spain'' for 
     information on the case against General Pinochet and other 
     Chilean military officials accused of international terrorism 
     and crimes against humanity.
       It is our understanding that the United States has 
     materials and other critical information that will help link 
     Pinochet directly to acts of international terrorism. These 
     materials and information were obtained during the U.S. 
     investigation of the assassination of Orlando Letelier, a 
     Chilean exile, and Ronni Karpen Moffitt, his American 
     colleague. They were brutally murdered in Washington, D.C., 
     in 1976 when a bomb exploded under their car while driving 
     around Sheridan Circle on their way to work. The 
     assassination was determined to be the work of the Chilean 
     secret police. It was also alleged, but unproven at the time, 
     that Pinochet was directly involved in the killings.
       Unfortunately, we have been informed that the U.S. Justice 
     Department has given only public documents to the Spanish 
     judge, and has not ordered any classified material to be 
     delivered. In addition, the Assistant United States Attorney 
     assigned to obtain testimony from key witnesses in the case 
     against Pinochet and other former military leaders has not 
     elicited key testimony from people convicted in the Letelier-
     Moffitt killings.
       We have also learned that the Spanish judge is planning to 
     submit an expanded Rogatory Commission requesting in detail 
     the documents and witness testimony the U.S. government 
     should provide.
       We urge you to direct the Justice Department and other 
     relevant agencies to act with haste in delivering the 
     appropriate solicited material. Your involvement now will 
     send a clear signal that you plan to take all steps necessary 
     to stop international terrorism and bring to justice those 
     responsible for heinous crimes against humanity, including 
     the killing of an American citizen on American soil.
       We note that the Spanish judge's petitions are based on the 
     European Convention on Terrorism that requires signatories to 
     cooperate with each other's judicial processes in cases of 
     terrorism. Certainly, the United States has a stake in 
     becoming part of this process. In addition, the Justice 
     Department previously determined that Spain properly 
     requested documents from the United States based on the 
     Mutual Legal Assistance Treaty, signed by Spain and the 
     United States.
       We appreciate your commitment to stop international 
     terrorism. We strongly believe, however, that without 
     concrete actions to back up your commitment, international 
     terrorism will continue unabated. The case against Pinochet 
     and his allies presents a significant opportunity to work 
     with the world community to punish those responsible for 
     international crimes in Chile, the United States, and 
     elsewhere. We strongly urge you to support Britain and Spain 
     by releasing critical information to the Spanish judge as 
     quickly as possible. We understand that some of the materials 
     in question are of a classified nature. We believe steps can 
     be taken to comply with Spain's request without compromising 
     U.S. security interests and that these steps must be taken 
     immediately. The world is watching closely as you consider 
     this request. Absent our firm response, terrorists will 
     continue to believe they can act with impunity.
         George Miller; John Conyers; Nancy Pelosi; John Olver; 
           Maurice D. Hinchey; Alcee L. Hastings; Cynthia A.

[[Page H3128]]

           McKinney; Howard L. Berman; Bob Filner; Anna G. Eshoo; 
           Henry A. Waxman; Jim McDermott; George E. Brown, Jr.; 
           Neil Abercrombie; Barbara Lee; Sam Gejdenson; Bernard 
           Sanders; Lane Evans; John F. Tierney; Martin Olav Sabo; 
           Rosa L. DeLauro; Lynn C. Woolsey; Carolyn B. Maloney; 
           Barney Frank; Lloyd Doggett; Frank Pallone; Charles B. 
           Rangel; David E. Bonior; Nita M. Lowey; Danny K. Davis; 
           James P. McGovern; Pete Stark; Jesse L. Jackson, Jr.; 
           Lucille Roybal-Allard; Marcy Kaptur; Elijah E. 

                         March 17, 1998, (revised March 19, 1998).
     Hon. William Jefferson, Clinton,
     President of the United States,
     Washington, DC.
       Dear Mr. President, Late last year, Justice Department 
     officials assured us that they would cooperate with a Spanish 
     judge investigating charges against General Augusto Pinochet, 
     former President and Commander in Chief of Chile, for 
     terrorism, genocide and crimes against humanity. Despite the 
     assurances of cooperation under the MLTA, it is our 
     understanding that the Justice Department effectively 
     stonewalled the judge when he visited the United States in 
     January, seeking to interview witnesses and retrieve 
     documents pursuant to his investigation.
       Instead of producing the witnesses and documents, as called 
     for under the MLTA, and despite the desire of the former 
     prosecutors (Eugene Propper and Larry Barcella) to 
     communicate substantive information which they had but which 
     was still classified, we have been informed that the 
     Administration prevented Propper and Barcella from reviewing 
     their notes and file material before testifying, did not try 
     to make confessed murders Michael Townley and Fernando Larios 
     available, and handed over virtually no documents. Their 
     reasoning, according to people who had talked to officials at 
     the State Department and National Security Council, was that 
     they were processing materials which were difficult to find 
     and were not likely to lead to useable evidence. They would 
     formally comply but only when the component agencies 
     processed the materials. In private, we are told, they note 
     that by not turning over the documents promptly and 
     ultimately by not offering much that is useful ``the U.S. had 
     nothing to lose.''
       They assess the possible damage to your impending visit to 
     Chile next month from not cooperating to be very low. 
     Apparently, U.S. Embassy sources believes that the anti-
     Pinochet opposition does not have enough strength to mount 
     effective demonstrations to interfere with your visit. They 
     also assume that the Chilean press will not ask you tough 
     questions about the U.S. refusal to hand over documents and 
     produce witnesses. Apparently at the Justice Department and 
     the State Department, the belief is that the United States 
     can ``get away with'' not cooperating and receive minimum 
     public relations damage.
       The motives for not cooperating with the Spanish judge 
     included fears that an indictment of Pinochet could put the 
     Chilean government in a precarious position on--and we find 
     this particularly difficult to believe at this time--that the 
     Chilean military might initiate a military coup.
       We also find incomprehensible U.S. non-cooperation in a 
     case that involves international terrorism, specifically the 
     most horrendous act of extraterritorial violence Washington, 
     D.C. has witnessed in the last fifty years--the car-bombing 
     of Orlando Letelier and Ronni Karpen Moffitt on September 21, 
     1976. As you know, the U.S. government indicted the head of 
     Chile's Intelligence and Secret Police agency, who recently 
     asserted in Chile what U.S. officials always believed: 
     Pinochet gave the order to kill Letelier in Washington.
       It seems to us that the Administration will force Members 
     of Congress to consider changing the terms of the NAFTA 
     debate. The assumption for admitting Chile to NAFTA 
     membership is that she is a functioning democracy. By 
     allowing the Chileans to put Pinochet beyond the reach of any 
     investigation, even U.S. compliance with a Spanish request, 
     the Administration is jeopardizing the integrity of other 
     treaty obligations under the anti-terrorism treaties. The 
     Administration and Congress should be alarmed at the 
     willingness of the Chilean government to ignore the growing 
     evidence about Pinochet's involvement in the Letelier 
       We will propose to our colleagues that before we debate the 
     merits of the new NAFTA and fast track agreements vis a vis 
     Chile, we should air the U.S. government's passivity when it 
     comes to investigating terrorism on our own soil and crimes 
     against humanity elsewhere.
       The U.S. should either work actively to deliver the most 
     complete set of declassified documents and witnesses to 
     Spanish judge Garcia Castellon, or face a more profound 
     debate on NAFTA, one that goes to the democratic nature of 
     our partners and the critical responsibilities that must 
     accompany any trade agreement.
       We respectfully request that you look seriously and 
     expeditiously into this troubling matter.
     George Miller, M.C.
     John Conyers, M.C.

                                              The White House,

                                     Washington, DC, June 3, 1998.
       Dear George: Thank you for your letter regarding our 
     cooperation with a Spanish judge investigating allegations 
     that General Augusto Pinochet and other former Chilean 
     officials are responsible for human rights abuses against 
     Spanish citizens as well as others.
       As you know, the Spanish judge's request was made under a 
     mutual legal assistance treaty (MLAT) we have with Spain. The 
     Department of Justice coordinates the execution of such 
     requests with the appropriate U.S. Government agencies. 
     Contrary to the information you may have received, the 
     Spanish authorities have indicated to the Justice Department 
     that they are very pleased with the extent of our cooperation 
     in responding to their request. The Department has 
     facilitated for Spanish authorities the depositions of 
     several individuals in the United States and has itself 
     deposed several other witnesses in whom the Spanish indicated 
     interest. While certain limits were placed on the testimony 
     that could be offered by two of these witnesses, this was due 
     to the fact that some of the information known by these 
     witnesses remains classified.
       In addition, the Justice Department has requested that the 
     relevant agencies conduct a search for documents responding 
     to the Spanish court's request. It has already transmitted 
     four boxes of materials relating to the prosecutions of those 
     responsible for the bombing of Orlando Letelier and Ronni 
     Moffitt as well as numerous additional documents from the 
     Department of State. Other agencies are continuing to conduct 
     their searches for relevant documents and will respond in the 
     near future.
       Our cooperation on this case is consistent with the 
     extensive efforts the United States Government has undertaken 
     to bring to justice those responsible for the Letelier-
     Moffitt murders. As you know, the United States Government 
     has successfully prosecuted several individuals responsible 
     for these killings and indicted several others. Two of these 
     individuals are now serving time in a Chilean prison for this 
     crime. I believe that the efforts the United States 
     Government has taken on this case show our resolve to deal 
     quickly and decisively with acts of terrorism on our soil.
       Finally, I want to assure you that we will continue to 
     respond as fully as we can to the request for assistance from 
     the Government of Spain.
       Thank you again for writing to me about this important 
                                                        Bill Clinton.  
  Mr. CONYERS. Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of the Hinchey 
  General Augusto Pinochet rose to power in a bloody coup d'etat in 
1973 that overthrew the democratically elected government of Salvador 
Allende. This ushered in seventeen years of military dictatorship 
accompanied by the death of thousands of activists, journalists and 
ordinary citizens.
  According to the Church Committee Report of December 1975, ``The CIA 
attempted, directly, to foment a military coup in Chile.'' Before 
Allende was inaugurated, it passed weapons to coup plotters. When that 
failed, it undertook a massive effort to undermine the government. 
Senator Church found that ``Eight million dollars was spent in the 
three years between the 1970 election and the military coup in 1973. 
Money was furnished to media organizations, to opposition political 
parties and, in limited amounts, to private sector organizations.''
  Much of this is history in the sense that the repression in Chile has 
stopped, and that country has made a remarkable transition to democracy 
over the last decade. However, many are still forced to live with the 
pain of General Pinochet's legacy and there is still far too much 
information still being withheld from the public record about the 
American role in Chile during those dark years.
  The arrest of Pinochet in England last year was a tremendous step 
forward for international law, reconciliation and human rights. Much of 
the power to keep justice moving forward lies in the hands of the CIA, 
the Department of Justice and other agencies of the U.S. government who 
have been asked by the Spanish Judge prosecuting Pinochet, Garcia 
Castellon, to provide information about Pinochet's reign of terror.
  Even before the arrest of Pinochet, the Department of Justice assured 
Congressman George Miller and I that they were cooperating fully with 
Judge Castellon's inquiry. I am inserting into the Record an article 
from the New York Times of June 27, 1997 which makes this point clear.
  I am neither satisfied with the Department of Justice's response thus 
far nor with the CIA's outright refusal to cooperate with the inquiry. 
This is simply inconsistent with the American commitment to the 
promotion of human rights.
  This is especially remarkable since along with the Chileans and 
Europeans who were murdered by Pinochet's hand were several Americans. 
Ronni Moffit, a fellow at the Institute for Policy Studies, and the 
former Chilean ambassador, Orlando Letelier were killed in one of the 
worst domestic terrorism incidents ever in Washington, DC. The attack 
was carried out by DINA, the Chilean intelligence agency whose director 
has stated that

[[Page H3129]]

Pinochet personally ordered the bombing. Even Elliot Abrams, Ronald 
Reagan's Assistant Secretary of State for Latin American Affairs, has 
suggested in the conservative journal Commentary that if Pinochet is 
responsible for the Letelier-Moffit bombing he should be extradited to 
the United States for trial. Section 304, Paragraph (a)(3) of the 
Hinchey Amendment and will help shed much needed light on who is 
responsible for this and other brutal murders.
  The American people will never know the truth unless their government 
expresses greater enthusiasm for prosecuting the Pinochet case both in 
London and in Washington. The Hinchey Amendment is a critical step in 
that direction and I urge my colleagues to support it.

                [From the New York Times, June 27, 1999]

      U.S. Will Give Spanish Judge Documents for Pinochet Inquiry

       Madrid, June 26.--The United States has agreed to provide 
     Government documents to a Spanish judge investigating 
     terrorism and human-rights violations in Chile during the 
     right-wing dictatorship of Gen. Augusto Pinochet from 1973 to 
       It is the first investigation of crimes against humanity in 
     the death or disappearance of people during the Pinochet era. 
     The judge, who functions as a prosecutor under Spanish law, 
     is seeking evidence of genocide against Spanish citizens and 
     descendants of Spaniards.
       But the case is even broader, and could delve into abuses 
     against at least 3,000 people of various nationalities, 
     including Charles Horman, an American whose disappearance in 
     Chile was depicted in the film ``Missing,'' said Juan E. 
     Garces, a Madrid lawyer representing relatives of the 
       The Madrid judge, Manuel Garcia Castellon, began the 
     criminal investigation last year, and in February requested 
     all pertinent documents from United States Government 
     agencies. Washington will cooperate ``to the extent permitted 
     by law,'' said a letter signed by Assistant Attorney General 
     Andrew Fois on May 23.
       The letter, addressed to Representative John Conyers, 
     Democrat of Michigan, was also sent to the national security 
     adviser, Sandy Berger, the State Department and ranking 
     members of the House International Relations Committee.
       Spain stands a good chance of getting useful American 
     documents about General Pinochet's Government because the 
     request came under a 1990 legal assistance treaty that allows 
     a wider sweep in searching for information, said Richard J. 
     Wilson, a law professor at American University in Washington.
       The Judge has not yet charged anyone, but might seek the 
     extradition to Spain of General Pinochet, who is still 
     commander of the Chilean Army, Mr. Garces said.
       Mr. Garces was an assistant to President Salvador Allende 
     Gossens of Chile, a Socialist, who died in September 1973 
     when General Pinochet led a coup that overthrew the elected 
     Marxist Government.
       In a separate action, another Madrid judge is investigating 
     human rights abuses against 320 Spaniards under military rule 
     in Argentina from 1976 to 1983. The judge, Baltasar Garzon, 
     has also requested United States Government documents for his 
       The Chilean Government last month termed Spain's 
     investigation a ``political trial'' of Chile's transition to 
     democracy that began with elections in 1990. On Wednesday, it 
     said the American cooperation with the Spanish judge was 
     ``positive'' but ``would not lead anywhere.''
       The Madrid court and the American Embassy said today that 
     they had not received official confirmation of Washington's 
     agreement to provide documents.

  The CHAIRMAN. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentleman from Florida (Mr. Goss) to the amendment offered by the 
gentleman from New York (Mr. Hinchey).
  The amendment to the amendment was agreed to.
  The CHAIRMAN. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentleman from New York (Mr. Hinchey), as amended.
  The amendment, as amended, was agreed to.

FAS | Government Secrecy | News ||| Index | Search | Join FAS